Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Culture’ Category

If you want to know what a culture steeped in the toxic feminist stew of kneejerk anti-male hatred looks like, this news clipping will help focus the picture.

A man suspected of raping a woman at knife point after hours on the El Molino High School campus was to be released from jail Thursday after prosecutors said they found evidence that may clear him of the assault.

Sheriff’s officials initially said a masked David J. Kocalis, 24, of Guerneville sneaked up behind the woman Aug. 30, held a knife to her and raped her near the Forestville school’s tennis courts.

He was arrested the next day on charges carrying a possible life sentence after the woman identified a prominent tattoo, and the car he was driving was captured on videotape.

But prosecutor Brian Staebell said Thursday investigators have since uncovered evidence that may point to his innocence. A judge allowed Kocalis, who had been held on $1.2 million bail, to be released on his own recognizance.

His lawyer, Evan Zelig, said a review of cellphone records showed Kocalis and the 18-year-old woman knew each other. Earlier in the day, she sent him a text message inviting Kocalis for sex, Zelig said.

Their tryst began inside his borrowed Porsche SUV but moved to a spot near the tennis courts because the car’s alarm kept going off, Zelig said.

After it was over, Kocalis drove the woman home, the lawyer said. She fabricated a story about being raped because she missed her curfew and Kocalis refused to lend her $20, Zelig said.

“It was determined her story was not credible whatsoever,” Zelig said outside court. “It was completely made up.”

This is a War on Men, whatever else you want to call it. An utterly innocent man was arrested, thrown in jail, and held on $1.2 million bail because this bitch was pissed he didn’t lend her $20 and she needed an excuse to tell her parents why she was out late.

Another false rape accusation leads to a man’s public shaming, and you can lay the blame on a feminist cunt propaganda machine that’s plugged into every apparatus of our tyrannical state. These noxious miscarriages of justice wouldn’t happen with such regularity if the legal system weren’t so prejudicially inclined to assume the best of women’s intentions and the worst of men’s.

Fuck feminism, fuck feminist water carriers like Emma Watson, and fuck the white knights lapping the runny shit of feminist hags for promises of steamy pig snatch.

Read Full Post »

Equalist leftoids are feeling the heat from rebel samizdat. You can sense it in the op-eds littering Hivemind propaganda outlets. Headlines are increasingly defensive, sounding more like rallying cries for one last stand in the name of the Narrative.

Examples abound. Here’s one from the front page of CNN.

Spanking is bad – especially for blacks.

It’s largely an opinion piece against parental corporal punishment — especially for blacks — with a link to two associational studies that don’t really tell us if spanking — especially for blacks — is itself a cause, rather than a symptomatic property, of the vibrant black behavioral profile.

The smarter equalists, like the writer of the above op-ed, can feel which way the subversive winds are blowing (does the Chateau infect hearts and minds? the thought titillates!), and will attempt to co-opt Narrative destroyers with preemptive blanket assertions to the contrary before white electorate opinion hardens into thoughtcrime. The insidious Hiveminders will even armor their defensive bunkers with the trappings of anti-Narrative themes.

So, for instance, in the above article, the field operative Hiveminder, who fears that the wrong sort of people will draw the wrong sorts of ugly conclusions about possible racial differences in effective child rearing, couches his contrary assertion in language that is more congenial to anti-Narrative foes, and in so doing rob his rebellious antagonists of spirited resolve. What you get, then, is “spanking is bad for black kids because {proof by assertion} black kids are no different than white or asian kids who are spanked less, and {soothing but substance-free pabulum for good-hearted but naive whites} the black communitaaah needs to be the one to condemn their own culture of spanking.”

It’s all very enlightening from a sociological perspective, and heartening for agents of change too, because what’s happening now is that the first cracks in the Hivemind honeycomb are appearing, and scaring the buzzfeeding bees into a frenzy. Soul-deformed leftoids are using every psychological tool they have at their wicked disposal to protect the Equalist Anti-White* Narrative from guerrilla attack by no-fucks-given Realstinger wasps. They are denying, lying, and disingenuously mollifying, and when they aren’t doing those things they are smearing, slandering, and nuking comment sections.

The walls are closing in around the Hive. The Chateau marquises prefer the iron maiden for maximum pain amplification.

Well, Clarice… have the bees stopped buzzing?

I predict in the coming years we’ll see more and more transparently desperate and laughable attempts by the media, entertainment, bureaucratic and tenured academic complexes to assert the dominance and relevancy of their dog-eared Anti-White Male Testament in the face of mounting countervailing evidence and a growing army of shiv wielders all too happy to draw blood from the Myth King Xerxes.

*It may seem that Equalism and Anti-White Spite are contradictory, but in fact the former is just cover for the latter, which is the true animating philosophy of the Lords of Lies. Adherents to Equalism exploit the cheat code of religious faith in universal equality to proselytize against White heathens, the only enemy capable of ending their reign of madness.

Read Full Post »

Pulled from the briskly invigorating comments to this insightful Mangan post on the paradox of nationalism. The discussion had moved into explanations for the apparently self-immolating pathologically altruistic universalism that characterizes people of NW European descent. A commenter digs up a Darwin quote that suggests the wise man understood the dynamics of outbreeding and reinforcing cultural feedbacks (feelbacks?) to create a universalistic morality among the populace.

in other words, there’s been something of a runaway universalism

Just as Darwin predicted in his ‘Descent of Man’.

“As man advances in civilisation, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all the members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races. If, indeed, such men are separated from him by great differences in appearance or habits, experience unfortunately shews us how long it is, before we look at them as our fellow-creatures.

Sympathy beyond the confines of man, that is, humanity to the lower animals, seems to be one of the latest moral acquisitions. It is apparently unfelt by savages, except towards their pets. How little the old Romans knew of it is shewn by their abhorrent gladiatorial exhibitions. The very idea of humanity, as far as I could observe, was new to most of the Gauchos of the Pampas. This virtue, one of the noblest with which man is endowed, seems to arise incidentally from our sympathies becoming more tender and more widely diffused, until they are extended to all sentient beings. As soon as this virtue is honoured and practised by some few men, it spreads through instruction and example to the young, and eventually becomes incorporated in public opinion.”

More memetic than genetic.

More? Could be both equally. I do think proponents of out- and inbreeding genetic theories of universalism tend to give short shrift to the role that culture-gene feedback loops play in amplifying nascent changes in a people’s character and moral sense. Cf, the recent surge in obesity.

Darwin considered the evolution of wide-ranging and unprejudiced empathy toward others the “noblest” of human virtues. But, he also understood that there were races of man, past and present, who would not or could not return the favor. In reconciling this inherent contradiction bedeviling those who wished to believe in a one-world humanity of equal moral disposition, Darwin glimpsed the outline of a tyrannical self-monitoring masochism and the development of cultural institutions to codify that tyranny of the mind.

More of the perceptive man’s thoughts:

Darwin goes on to touch upon what today is called political correctness…

“The highest possible stage in moral culture is when we recognise that we ought to control our thoughts, and “not even in inmost thought to think again the sins that made the past so pleasant to us.”* Whatever makes any bad action familiar to the mind, renders its performance by so much the easier. As Marcus Aurelius long ago said, “Such as are thy habitual thoughts, such also will be the character of thy mind; for the soul is dyed by the thoughts.”*(2)

* Tennyson, Idylls of the King, p. 244.
*(2) Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Bk. V, sect. 16.”

Darwin, as well as great minds from long before his time, foresaw our modern PC, anti-white male witch burning death culture. The point of anti-white propaganda and ritualistic shaming of those who dare to question the reigning equalist narrative is humiliation of wrongthinkers. Humiliate those who entertain even wispy tendrils of wrongthought and you spare the universalist religion and its glassy-eyed Hivemind followers from suffering stains of dispiriting truth upon its soul.

Read Full Post »

From a Facebook feed:

Self-report bias may make sex survey data less than reliable indicators of when-the-lights-are-off sexual behavior, but widely-held cultural perceptions that can elicit knowing chuckles from most people are often windows into real world behaviors of a Silent Depravity that aren’t captured by pencil and paper divining tests.

The graphic above doesn’t say that married couples are all swinging dicks ruling over Golden Whore concubines. What it taps into instead is a recognition that the premarital dating market is skewed in ways big and small toward the advantage of alpha males who, when they and their female admirers are left to their own devices, tend to juggle concurrent lovers while women who catch the eye of these lordly alpha males tend to ignore lesser men for their true desires.

This sexual market reality may dissipate under the constraints of the marriage market, but it never fully disappears. One ignores deeply rooted psychological and libidinous differences between the sexes at peril of their own romantic fortunes.

Read Full Post »

eofahapi asks,

are you going to write about the Rotherham thing? It needs a voice that is not delusional like the “Not all Muslims are like that” blah blah blah.

There are two camps of thinking. One says Rotherham is the logical outcome of extreme white ethnomasochism, which is itself a manifestation of pathological altruism, a reflexive mental condition that evolved over millennia of outbreeding. In this take, self-loathing, holier-than-thou whites in positions of power (and less powerful whites refusing to demand accountability from their leaders) are so wedded to their equalist ideology that they will allow the rapes of 1,400 white women and girls by brown skinned goatherders to continue ad infinitum until they are called to the carpet by the preponderance of evidence (and by samizdat rebels releasing uncomfortable facts). This theory presupposes that the ethnomasochist ego is so tender and fragile it cannot withstand confrontation with ugly truths about the reality of race and diversity, so the ego acts to preserve itself with PC social rules that create a bubble of self-soothing pabulum which permits them to go on confident that their worldview isn’t discredited. Since ethnomasochists thrive on external validation from other ethnomasochists, what happens is that their status signaling apparatuses get warped into self-abnegating paeans to the lie that whites are the root of all evil.

The second theory is that the anti-white elite whites aren’t at all ethnomasochists, but are instead a burgeoning new (or orthogonally ancient) race of whites — and here I use the term race in its figurative as well as genetic senses — who don’t perceive themselves at all as part of a broader white identity that must be preserved against barbarian attack. If this theory is correct, the sacrifice of 1,400 white women to brown predations will hardly move them emotionally. They won’t feel sympathy because they don’t feel any kinship, and so for them to sweep the evil of non-whites committed against non-elite whites under the rug is practically a procedural formality with little consequence. If anything, they would welcome such third world predators as allies in their own psychological war against “less enlightened” whites.

Which theory is true, or more true, is debatable. What isn’t is that these traitors need to swing from the gallows soon, before their sickness infects us all and dooms us to extinction.

***

eofahapi also wonders about the nature of feminists,

Because we know that there are differences in male and female brains, if a woman had hyper testosterone, would she really be feminist? I am skeptical, because feminists tend to be not the most logic people. Feminism is a very emotion based movement, and if you try to challenge one with logic it usually becomes heated ad hominens.

Feminists appear to be burdened with the worst of each sex: The aggressive posturing of men combined with the emotional irrationality of women. Not unlike misbehaving children. And what do you do with misbehaving children? You set boundaries and punish them when they act up.

Read Full Post »

There was a “Go-Topless Day” in NY this past Sunday. Two hundred (mostly) women and four hundred boobs marched in protest of those wrong kinds of white people in those horribly backward flyover states who force women to wear burqas over their nipples when out in public.

Hey I am all for women — but only cute women — having the freedom to display their naked bodies in public, as long as those women accept that men have the freedom to leer at their naked bodies and Instagram photos of their titties for Dad back home. But I’m thinking these weirdo cult feminists wouldn’t be down with that part of the individual freedom deal. Equal rights, yo.

Always with these slut parades there are mixed in with the occasional cuties an insane asylum of grotesqueries and/or subversives who provide fodder for normal people to point and jeer. This time it was a couple of men with huge, pendulous manboobs demanding the right to swing their milktits in little Johnny’s face. At least, I think they’re men, but who can tell for sure. Freaks have a knack for looking like they’re stuck in the pupal stage morphing from one species to another.

There’s one manboob, all the way to the right.

Here he is with his buddy, in a clearer shot.

Let your manboobs out, freedom fighter! Why weren’t their nips pixelated? Two dirigibles sporting flapjack mammaries is less offensive to the taste than female boobs? If the goal here is to uphold norms of journalistic conduct, these two gelatinous blobs should’ve been blurred head to toe.

“Slut pride” is synonymous with “civilization perishing”. By the time your culture gets to the point where women are proud for doing something that their grandmothers were proud of NOT doing, you should have your post-collapse plans squared away.

Read Full Post »

Welcome to AndrogyNation, where women are turned into feminist lackeys and start to comport themselves in ways that betray a venomous loathing of natural male desire. Exhibit A: Jennifer Lawrence post-locks:

Still smashable, but here she is from a bygone era with long hair:

499 out of 500 doctors of love agree… so much hotter.

Boycuts optimize the looks of vanishingly few women. The best you can say about a woman with short, cropped hair is that she looks almost as good as she does with long hair. Audrey Hepburn was a classic representative of the ingenue who looks impishly sexy with short hair. But long-haired photos of Audrey prove that she looked even better with her tresses out and about for a playful romp.

Given the near-universal preference of men for longer-haired women, it is then a mystery why women chop their hair off. Don’t women want to please men? They do, but cultural and sex ratio shifts can influence how weakly or strongly women feel the need to appease the sexual preferences of men.

The last period short hair styles were widely fashionable on women (as well as flapper dresses which concealed the female form) was the Roaring Twenties, a time of feminism, suffrage, intensified status striving, and growing wealth inequality. Sound familiar?

A social milieu in which protector and provider beta males economically fall behind, home and hearth become secondary considerations to riding the cock carousel, and status whoring among women reaches a crescendo is also a milieu wherein women don’t feel much need to look and behave in the demure feminine manner that is attractive to men. We are again ovaries deep in that androgynous America zeitgeist, one defined by masculinizing women and feminizing men. Expect it to get worse before it gets better (if it ever does).

Avowed feminists loathe male desire because most feminists are ugly and resent that they aren’t the objects of male desire. These loudmouthed bitterbitches drag normal women in their wake, and a general antipathy toward men and men’s sexual preferences, already pushed in motion by larger social forces, coalesces as malign media propaganda and institutional lunacy.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,028 other followers

%d bloggers like this: